Credit management for electronic brokerage system

ABSTRACT

An anonymous trading system (FIG.  1 ) identifies the best bids and offers (QuoteSubmit, FIG.  3 ) from those counterparties (WS A 1 a 1 ) with which each party (WS A 1 fb 1,  WS A 1 b 2 , ... WS A 2 a 2 ) is currently eligible to deal, while maintaining the anonymity of the potential counterparty and the confidentiality of any specific credit limitations imposed by the anonymous potential counterparty. To that end, each bid or offer (QuoteSubmit, FIG.  3 ) for a particular type of financial instrument is prescreened by the system for compatibility with limited credit information (for example, a one bit flag indicating whether a predetermined limit has already been exceeded) and an anonymous “Dealable” price ( 24,26 ) is calculated for each of the traders (WS A 1 b, . . . WS A 2 a) dealing with that particular financial instrument.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This is a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/169,884, filed Oct.12, 1998 now abandoned, which is a continuation of prior applicationSer. No. 08/665,594, filed Jun. 18, 1996 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,014,627),which is a continuation of prior application Ser. No. 08/324,843, filedOct. 18, 1994 (now abandoned), which is a continuation of priorapplication Ser. No. 07/830,408, filed Feb. 3, 1992 (now U.S. Pat. No.5,375,055).

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates generally to a electronic brokerage systemhaving a communication network connecting traders dealing in financialinstruments, and more particularly to a computerized system fordistributing anonymous price quotes on a selective basis in accordancewith previously established credit limits.

BACKGROUND ART

Reuters' published European patent applications EP 399 850, EP 407 026,and EP 411 748 disclose an automated matching system for anonymoustrading of foreign currencies (or other financial instruments) in whicha single host computer maintains a central data base consisting of allthe trading instruments available for trade, credit information, and thevarious bids and offers that are present throughout the system. The hostcomputer uses the information in its central data base to match activebids and offers (as well as executing any transitory “hit bid” and “takeoffer” transactions) based on matching criteria which include the grosscounterparty credit limit between counterparties to a potential matchingtransaction, price, and available quantity. To that end, each clientsite establishes and may subsequently vary or reset a credit limit foreach possible counterparty, which is used by the host computer toestablish the gross counterparty credit limit for each possible pair ofparties and which is equal to the minimum of the remaining credit(initial credit limit less any applicable transactions that have alreadybeen executed) from the first party to the second party and from thesecond party to the first party. The host computer blocks completion ofan otherwise eligible matching transaction between a given pair ofpotential counterparties when the transaction has an associated value inexcess of the applicable gross credit limit. In that system, the variousclient site computers (keystations) merely maintain and display arestricted subset of the information available at the central computer,such as a predetermined number of the best bids and offers, andcommunicate credit and other transaction oriented information to thehost computer for execution. However, in an attempt to preserve theanonymity of the parties, the client sites do not have access to anycredit limits set by their possible counterparties, or even to theidentification of any other party to a particular transaction untilafter a transaction has been completed.

Thus, in the known prior art system, confidential counterparty creditlimit data is maintained in real time and utilized as part of the tradematching process by a central host computer. As a consequence, eachclient site has no way to determine, prior to committing to buy or sellat a displayed price from one or more anonymous counterparties, whetherit is in fact eligible to respond to any of the bids or offers currentlybeing displayed. The client site is connected to the central hostcomputer by telecommunication lines; the host computer is not under thedirect control of the party providing the confidential credit limit dataand thus provides potential opportunities for unauthorized access to thecredit information, even though the host computer does not utilize thecredit information until a match has been found between a Buyer and aSeller.

Consequently, unless he attempts to execute a trade at the best pricecurrently displayed on his screen, a trader using the prior artanonymous matching system has no way of knowing whether he has creditwith, and is willing to extend credit to, the anonymous counterpartyoffering (bidding) the best price currently displayed on his screen andthus whether any attempt to buy or sell at the displayed price will besubsequently invalidated by the system for lack of such credit.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

It is an overall objective of the present invention to provide ananonymous trading system which can identify the best bids and offersfrom those counterparties with which each client site is currentlyeligible to deal, while maintaining the anonymity of the potentialcounterparty and the confidentiality of any specific credit limitationsimposed by the anonymous potential counterparty.

To that end, each client site preferably provides the system with onlylimited credit information for each potential counterparty (for example,a one bit flag indicating whether a predetermined limit has already beenexceeded) and each bid or offer for a particular type of financialinstrument is preferably prescreened by the system for compatibilitywith that limited credit information before calculating an anonymous“Dealable” price for presentation to any of the traders dealing withthat particular financial instrument.

In a presently preferred embodiment, the prescreening is a simple checkto determine whether any credit remains between the two possiblecounterparties to the potential transaction, and thus may be performedusing a simple yes/no Preauthorization Matrix before any bid or offer istransmitted to a particular client site.

In accordance with a preferred embodiment, such PreauthorizationMatrices are maintained at each of several regional nodes (“distributionnodes”) of a distributed processing communication network, with eachsuch distribution node being connected by corresponding individualpermanent links of the network to those client sites (“access nodes”)for which it is responsible for distributing market informationincluding customized “Dealable” bid and offer prices in addition toglobal “Best” prices.

More particularly, in the preferred embodiment, the sensitive creditlimit data indicating how much credit a particular client site iswilling to extend to each possible counterparty is maintained only at anaccess node associated only with that particular client, and only asimple yes/no indication of whether the entity (for example, a trader, aTrading Floor, or a bank) associated with that particular access node iswilling to transact business with a particular counterparty istransmitted to the other nodes of the communication network.

To further limit the data received and processed by each of the relevantregional node computers, (ie, the distribution nodes closest to theparticular site and/or closest to the particular counterparty), onlychanges in the credit state between a particular access node and aparticular counterparty (ie, credit is no longer available or credit isnow available) are transmitted to the distribution nodes, and any creditstate information only relevant to transactions between two client sitesboth associated with other distribution nodes, may be altogetherignored.

In a preferred embodiment of the system as currently contemplated, ifeither of the two applicable limits has not already been exceededbetween a particular pair of counterparties, the system displays theentire bid or offer as a “Dealable” transaction, but permits each clientsite to block any above-limit portion of any resultant buy or selltransaction during a subsequent deal execution/verification process.Alternatively, possibly at the option of the party by or for whom thelow limit has been set, the entire transaction could be executed, or theentire transaction could be blocked. As a second alternative, thePreauthorization Matrix could indicate whether sufficient creditremained to execute a predetermined “standard” deal amount in additionto, or instead of, a mere indication as to whether any credit from aparticular potential counterparty had already been used up. In such analternate embodiment it might also be possible to display to each tradertwo “Dealable” prices: one at which at least the predetermined“standard” amount is available, and a second price at which only a“Small” amount may be available.

As currently contemplated, each of the regional nodes transmits both aBest current price (for which a predetermined minimum quantity isavailable independent of any credit constraints) and a best Dealableprice (for which at least limited credit is presumably available on abilateral basis with at least one of the counterparties making the bidor offer), as well as a “Small” indicator that may indicate a thinpotential market in which that predetermined minimum quantity is notavailable at any price from any counterparty with whom the trader iseligible to deal, but nevertheless a smaller quantity is available fromone or more of such eligible counterparties. In determining whether sucha predetermined minimum quantity is available, the system may considercomposite deals from more than one Maker or at more than one price, inwhich case the displayed price is preferably the least advantageousprice included in the best such composite deal. In an alternativeembodiment, the system does not take into account such composite dealswhen displaying a price, but still identifies the oldest quote at thebest price as a potential match, thereby giving the traders the benefitof any price advantages for smaller sizes.

In accordance with another aspect of the preferred embodiment, at leastthe first Maker having an open quote that is displayable as the BestDealable Price (which may be the “Best Small Dealable Price” or “BestRegular Dealable Price” at any of the other Trading Floors isautomatically alerted that his bid (offer) quotation is the BestDealable Price available to at least one potential counterparty withwhom mutual credit exists, and thus could be hit (taken) at any time.Similarly, at least if the quoter's bid (offer) quote is equal to theBest Dealable Price but is not the first in time at at least one TradingFloor and is thus subject to immediately being hit (taken) by a traderat that Trading Floor, he is preferably also alerted if his quote is“joined” i.e., equal to in price, but later in time) to such a “BestDealable Price” from another Trading Floor.

Preferably, in accordance with another aspect of the invention, thesystem also determines whether a Quote has been “bettered”; that is tosay, no longer qualifies as a Best Dealable Price (or joined to such aprice) at at least one potential counterparty. In that case, at thetrader's option, the system will automatically cancel such a betteredprice.

In accordance with yet another aspect of the invention, the displayedBest Dealable Price (unless accompanied by the “Small” indicator) isvalid for at least a predetermined minimum quantity (which, as notedpreviously, may be a composite of small sizes from more than one source,or which always reflects a regular size from only one source, dependingon system design tradeoffs and/or the trader preferences) and onlyprices and not quantities are displayed. However, assuming that the BestRegular Dealable Price for a regular quantity is greater than the BestSmall Dealable Price, each trader may optionally select which of the twosuch Best Dealable prices is displayed.

When a “buy” or “sell” is made for a quantity in excess of thecumulative applicable credit limits associated with the counterpartieshaving open quotes equal to or better than the displayed price and thusthe completed transaction is for a cumulative quantity smaller thandesired by the trader, the trader preferably then has the option of“working the balance” (in which the system automatically generates abid/offer for the difference).

In accordance with yet another aspect of the invention, changes in theBest Dealable Price and specifics of any subsequent transactionsinitiated by the trader are optionally vocalized electronically by thetrader's terminal and provided to the trader in audible form, togetherwith succinct details of any subsequent transactions. For example:Whenever there is a change in the Best Dealable “Buy” Price, the leastsignificant digits of that price are electronically converted to textwhich in turn is converted to digital speech using conventional speechsynthesis circuitry.

The above description refers to the processing and distribution of dataas though they were instantaneous processes; it will be appreciated bythose skilled in the art that some delay is inherent in the type ofsystem described, and that as a consequence, the information availableat a particular processing node does not always reflect the most currentinformation available anywhere in the system. However, at least in apreferred embodiment, any such delays in the display of Best DealablePrice information may be kept within acceptable limits by transmittingonly changes over the communication network, by using several processingnodes operating in parallel to compute the Best Dealable Priceinformation for different Trading Floors and/or different currencies,and by providing dedicated communication links between each processingnode and its associated Trading Floors.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Other objects and features of the present invention will be apparentfrom the following description of a presently preferred embodiment takenin connection with the accompanying drawings, in which:

FIG. 1 is an overview of the Communication Network and the variousworkstations and processing nodes associated therewith;

FIG. 2 depicts the trader's Buy/Sell display;

FIG. 3 depicts the trader's Quote display;

FIG. 4 depicts the Trader Profile Display;

FIG. 5 shows the flow of messages in the communication network which areused to generate and distribute Dealable price information to eachindividual trader;

FIG. 6 depicts a Preauthorization Matrix; and

FIG. 7 is a functional flowchart showing how the Dealable price iscomputed.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT

In the described embodiment, the computerized trading system is anelectronic brokerage system having a communication network forfacilitating the buying and selling of large blocks of foreign currencyby traders each associated with his own Workstation (“WS”) located at aTrading Floor of a subscriber bank (“client site”). As shown in FIG. 1,each client site has its dedicated client site computer (“Market AccessNode”, or “MAN”) under the control of a Floor Administrator, whichmaintains transaction records, credit limits, and other confidentialinformation originating with its associated Trading Floor. The WS's andthe MAN associated with each Trading Floor are connected via aconventional self-repairing DEC VAX network to a nearby distributionnode (“Market Distributor” or “MD”) computer, which typically analyzesand distributes current market data by means of dedicated permanentcommunication links to one or more associated MAN's in a particular city(or other local region), and which may also provide administrativefunctions for the communication network. Although not consideredcritical to the present invention, a group of MD's is preferablysupplemented by a common Trading Region processing node (“ArbitratorNode” or “ARB”), with the ARB performing those functions (such asidentifying potential matches between Buyers and Sellers, and otheraspects of the “Dealing Matching” process that require coordination withmore than one client site) which make the most efficient use of thecommunication network if done centrally or regionally, while the MD'sperform those functions (such as generation of separate Dealable priceinformation for each individual client site) which are readilyimplemented in parallel in a distributed processing network and whichmake most efficient use of the communication if done locally or in closeproximity to the individual client sites.

In that regard, it is preferable to have more than one ARB, with eachARB having primary responsibility for trades initiated by Market Makersin the ARB's own Trading Region, and being connected to all the MAN'sand MD's of that Trading Region as well as to the other ARB's in otherTrading Regions by permanent dedicated links of the communicationnetwork. In the majority of deals, it is anticipated that both the Makerand the Taker will be within the same Trading Region and thus will bedirectly linked to the same ARB which can therefore identify a potentialmatch and coordinate its final execution without any communication withthe other ARB's; at the same time, the other ARB's can simultaneously beprocessing deals related to other traders in other regions. Connectingthe various ARB's with one another by dedicated permanent communicationlinks not only facilitates deals with a Taker in a remote Trading Regionwho does not normally have any direct link to the Maker's ARB, but alsoprovides an efficient communication network for broadcasting pricequotes to all the traders in other Trading Regions. Preferably, thevarious MD's, MAN's and ARB's are each provided with a local backupalready connected to the communication network in accordance with theteachings of the commonly assigned U.S. patent application entitled“ACTIVATION OF A DORMANT SIBLING COMPUTER IN A COMMUNICATION NETWORK”and filed 9 Nov. 1990 under Ser. No. 07/612,045; however, it is alsopossible, albeit wasteful of communication resources, to establishtemporary communication links between the MAN's and MD's of one tradingarea and an ARB in a remote trading area, so that the remote ARB canfunction as an emergency backup for the local ARB. In any event, thesystem is preferably provided with a self-test and re-initializationcapability to detect discrepancies between the local data basesmaintained at each of the local (MD) and regional (ARB) processingnodes, and to regenerate missing or questionable data from correspondingdata stored at other nodes.

Whether the communication links between nodes are permanent (maintainedindefinitely between two network components) or temporary (establisheddynamically for a short period of time) they are preferably “logicallinks” which have the property that messages sent in a certain orderover the same logical link are guaranteed to reach their destination inthe same order. Moreover, the communication network is preferablyprovided with sufficient error detection, error correction, and networkself-repair capability to guarantee that messages sent via these logicallinks are error free.

In summary, each MAN is connected to other MAN's by a robustcommunication network which connects the various Trading Floors andwhich supplements the MAN's with a number of processing nodes(preferably in the form of MD's and ARB's) to facilitate thedistribution of price quotations and other market data and to executetransactions by matching eligible Market Makers with eligible Buyers andSellers and by monitoring the transactions until they have beencompleted or aborted, with the MAN's being responsible for Trading Floorspecific tasks such as logging the completed transaction and updatingthe credit limit that was previously available to the counterpartyTrading Floor.

The structure and function of the trader WS's, MAN's, MD's, and ARB'swill now be described in detail, with particular emphasis on how theycooperate to distribute price quotes (bids and offers) from a MarketMaker to potential Takers throughout the system. In the prior art, suchquotes were made available to the individual traders merely in the formof one or more public best prices for each currency pair (or otherfinancial instrument type) then being offered by any Market Maker,without regard for any confidential credit restrictions imposed by theMaker or by the potential Taker that may prevent any deal beingconsummated. However, in accordance with the present invention, eachtrader receives a private Dealable price, which the system hasprescreened for the absence of any credit restrictions that wouldprevent the trader on whose WS the Dealable price is displayed fromdealing with an anonymous Market Maker from whom the displayed priceoriginates.

As shown in FIGS. 2 through 4, each WS supports a single trader tradingin a single currency pair, and its display thus provides one or twopanels containing only information which a typical trader would consideressential to trading in that currency pair by means of an anonymousbrokerage system. However, the blank portion of the WS display couldobviously be used for other data related to another currency pair and/oranother type of transaction. Furthermore, the displayed panel could be awindow within a larger display that also displays data from otherinformation distribution and transaction processing systems.

FIG. 2 shows the trader's Buy/Sell display panel 10 which provides theprimary interface between the electronic brokerage system and theindividual traders. At the top of the display appears the currency pair12 (as shown, the Base Currency is United States dollars, Local Currencyis German marks), and at the top right, the “Value Date” 14 (the date onwhich any resultant trade is scheduled for payment). The next linecomprises (from left to right): the “Figure” (the most significant threeor four digits) 16 of the “Sell” (“bid”) price, conventionally expressedin units of Local Currency (eg, DM 1.72) per single unit of BaseCurrency (eg, US$1.00); two additional digits 18, 20 (commonly referredto as “Pips”) which respectively reflect the remaining two or threeleast significant digits of the displayed “Best Dealable” bid and offerPrice (ie, the best price at which at least one anonymous Market Makeris willing to buy the Local Currency, and the best price at which atleast one anonymous Market Maker is willing to sell the Local Currency);and the “Figure” 22 of the “Best” offer price.

A Market Maker will always want to purchase a commodity at a lower pricethan the price at which he is willing to sell the same commodity and hisbid price will thus be less than his offer price. Moreover, the tradingsystem is preferably able to “automatch” a bid price from one Maker withan equal or lower offer price from another Maker, assuming that the twoMakers have sufficient credit with each other. Accordingly, thedisplayed “Best price” 18, 20 will normally reflect a price spread inwhich the offer price is equal to or higher than the bid price; howeverat times it may reflect an “Arbitrage Opportunity” in which a thirdparty having credit with the two Makers is able to buy at a lower offerprice from one Maker and sell at a higher bid price to the other Maker.

Furthermore, there is no requirement that a Market Maker must alwaysquote both a bid price and an offer price for the same quantity of theLocal Currency, or that if a bid (or offer) price is accepted by aSeller (or Buyer), any corresponding offer (or bid) price from thatMaker will be (preferably at the trader's option) automaticallywithdrawn. Thus it is also possible that an offer price but no bid price(or vice versa) will be displayed as the Best price 18, 20 at the top ofthe display.

As presently contemplated, the displayed Best bid and offer prices 18,20 are each valid for at least a predetermined quantity of currency (forexample five million US dollars) from a single source. Since such aquantity may be available at the displayed price in a compositetransaction involving more than one Maker and more than one price, it ispossible that at least a portion of the transaction could be executed ata better price than the displayed Best price 18, 20.

In accordance with the invention, the Best Dealable Prices are derivedonly from those bids or offers from other Trading Floors which have beenprescreened for at least some nominal level of remaining credit from thepotential Maker to the potential Taker and vice versa, and at least the“Pips” 24, 26 portion of the Dealable is prominently displayed orotherwise communicated to the potential Taker.

In the illustrated example, the associated Taker (and any other USD/DEMtraders on his Trading Floor) is thus eligible to sell German marks(“DEM”) at the bid rate of 1.7210 marks per dollar (“USD”), or to buy atthe offer rate of 1.7217 marks per dollar, and the system has alreadyverified that the displayed Best Dealable Price 24, 26 is currentlyavailable from one or more anonymous Makers with whom the trader iscurrently still eligible to deal, and that those eligible Makers arewilling (either collectively or individually, depending on the traderpreferences and/or design tradeoffs mentioned previously) to sell (orbuy) at least the same predetermined minimum quantity of the particularLocal Currency involved as was used to determine the displayed BestDealable Price 18, 20. Thus, a “regular” displayed Dealable Price 24, 26will never be better than the displayed Best Market Price 18, 20; ifworse than the Best Dealable Price 18, 20, this is an indication thatthe trader is barred by credit limitations from obtaining the BestMarket Price that is then theoretically available. Indeed, becausecredit is established bilaterally, it is possible that the Maker (orMakers) behind the Best Market Price have extended credit only toTrading Floors who currently have not extended any credit to thoseparticular Makers, and thus that none of the traders at any of theclient sites will see a Best Dealable Price equal to the displayed BestMarket Price.

The foregoing implicitly assumes that the Best Market Price 18, 20 andthe Best Dealable Price 24, 26 are sufficiently close that the Figures16, 22 are unaffected. If that is not the case, it is preferable thatthe displayed Figures correspond to the corresponding most significantdigits of the displayed Best Dealable Price; if the “Pips” of the BestMarket Price are worse than the corresponding least significant digitsof a displayed Best Dealable Price, it will be apparent that thecorresponding Figure of the Best Dealable Price should be incremented ordecremented by at least one digit to obtain the Best Market Price.

Moreover, as with the Best Market Price, it is possible that at least asmall quantity is available from one or more Makers at a better pricethan that which is currently displayed as a regular Best Dealable Price(or even that a better Best Dealable Price becomes available after theprice is displayed but before the Taker's Buy or Sell request isprocessed), in which case the trader may receive or pay an effectiveaverage price that is somewhat better than the currently displayed BestDealable Price. This will be the case whether the system has executed asingle transaction only with a second Maker with whom the better priceoriginated, or a composite transaction with that second Maker and theMaker with whom the displayed Best Dealable Price originated.

Instead of a regular Best Dealable Price (a “Best Regular DealablePrice”), a Best Small Dealable Price may be displayed preferablyidentified as such (for example, by the letter “S”) 28. The Best SmallDealable Price differs from the Best Regular Dealable Price in that onlya relatively small quantity is collectively available at any price fromthose Makers with whom the trader currently is eligible to deal. Forexample, if deal size is expressed in units of one million dollars, theBest Market Price and the Best Regular Dealable Price may each representavailable deals having a potential aggregate value (not necessarily allfrom the same trader) of at least 5 million dollars, while a BestDealable Small Price represents available deals having a maximumpotential value of between 1 and 4 million dollars. The Best RegularDealable price and Best Small Dealable Price are referred to genericallyas the Best Dealable Price.

Among the options available to each trader through his Trader Profilepanel (see FIG. 4) is the ability to display either the Best RegularDealable Price as described above, which is good for at least thepreviously mentioned predetermined minimum quantity (eg., at least 5million dollars), or the Best Small Dealable Price which is the bestprice available to that trader for even a nominal minimum quantity (eg,only 1 million dollars).

Preferably, the trader has also previously specified a defaulttransaction quantity using his Trader Profile Screen and the displayedDealable price functions as the default value for the trader's requestedtransaction price. Thus, the trader may quickly and accurately respondto a new Dealable bid or offer price by merely activating a Buy button36 or a Sell button 34, respectively on the screen, assuming that thedisplay is touch sensitive or is provided with a “mouse” or otherpointing device; alternatively the trader may use a small custom keypadhaving dedicated function keys for the various functions and dedicatedsize keys for various predetermined deal sizes as well as conventionalnumerical, tab and cursor keys. If the desired quantity 30, 32 is notavailable at the displayed Dealable price, as well be discussed in moredetail with respect to FIGS. 3 and 4, any missed quantity may be thesubject of a subsequent “working the balance” bid or offer.

In any event, the system gives the trader accepting a Best RegularDealable Price the benefit of any undisplayed Best Small Dealable Pricefrom an eligible counterparty that is “behind” (ie, equal to or betterthan) the Best Regular Dealable Price. In that case, the Buy or Sellrequest would be executed as two trades, one at the undisplayed SmallDealable Price, and the other at the displayed Best Regular DealablePrice.

As noted previously, the trading is performed electronically, and when abid price is equal to or greater than an offer price, the two willnormally be automatically matched, with the system automaticallyallocating any price difference between the two trader's in accordancewith previously agreed trading rules. Thus it is not likely that adisplayed bid price 18, 24 will be greater than a displayed offer price20, 26. However, if two traders are barred from dealing with each otherbecause of credit limit restrictions but are both free to deal with athird trader, it is still possible that the third trader will bepresented with an arbitrage opportunity.

When the Dealable price 24, 26 originates with the trader himself (oranother trader on the same Floor), the trader is preferably alerted tothat fact by displaying his price as the Dealable price, but in avisually distinctive manner and with the corresponding Buy or Sellfunction 36, 34 optionally inhibited. Thus, his Trading Floor may beprevented from in effect dealing with or against itself.

In accordance with another aspect of the invention, the displayed pricedata may optionally be “vocalized”: whenever there is a change in thedisplayed prices, the numerical data is electronically converted to textwhich in turn is converted to digital speech using conventional speechsynthesis circuitry. In that event, it is preferable that only the“Pips” of the Best Dealable Price quotes are announced (unless, due to alarge spread, this would result in an ambiguous price), so that thetrader will not be assaulted with nonessential information. Thus, thevocalized information will normally include only the least significantdigits (Pips) of the displayed Best Dealable Price (bid and offer), aswell as status changes for any recent quotes or hits initiated by thetrader. An exemplary trading scenario and the resultant vocalizedcommunications is presented in Table 1.

TABLE 1 Trader Action Broadcast Maker only Taker only Dealable price hasBid and offer 10–17 Bid side only 10 bid Bid size small 10–17 Small BidOffer side only 17 Offered Offer size small 10–17 Small Offer Bid andOffer Small 10–17 in Small Bid/Offer Pips = “00” Figure Bid = Offer 10Choice No Bid/Offer available Dollar/Mark please Dealable Bid/Offerremoved Bid/Offer out Bid and Offer removed Off the Price Price changefor Bid and Offer (worse Change only) You enter a Quote Bid/Offer/PricePosted Your Quote is best 10–17 Your Bid/Offer/Price Your Quote isBettered by another 14 Bid/Offered inside Trader you

Trader Action Broadcast Maker only Taker only You cancel QuoteBid/Offer/Price canceled Your Quote Joined by another traderBid/Offer/Price joined You Join a Quote from another trader You join theBid/Offer/Price Your Quote is no longer Joined Your Bid/Offer/Price onlyBid/Offer/Price you joined hit, but yours Still watching your availableBid/Offer/Price Your Bid is hit 10 Given (Small) 10 yours from Bank XYou Sell 10 to Bank Y Your Offer is Taken 17 Paid (Small) You Sell 10 toBank X You Buy 10 from Bank Y Your quote is partially dealt on WorkingYour Balance of X Maker's Quote not Hit for a period of Still workingyour time Bid/Offer/Price Taker's Attempt to hit a Bid or Offer Missedit failed (too slow) Taker's Buy/Sell missed Working your Balance of X

FIG. 3 shows how the display is transformed when the trader is notcontent to assume a passive role in which he merely reacts to dealssolicited by other traders, but rather wishes to assume for himself therole of a Market Maker. In that case, a Maker's “Quote” panel 40 appearsbelow the Taker's “Buy/Sell” panel 10 of FIG. 2, so that the trader mayact both as a Maker and as a Taker, using a pointing device or adesignated key of an alphanumeric keyboard to move between the twopanels. The Figures 42, 44 and Pips 46, 48 have the same function as inthe Taker's panel, and take their respective initial values from thecurrent Best price. As in FIG. 2, the bid information is on the left,while the offer information is on the right. Immediately below the priceinformation, the trader is presented with the relevant bid and offerquantities 48, 50, conventionally expressed in millions of US dollars.When the Maker's panel first appears, these quantities assume defaultvalues (10, 10) established by the trader's personal trading profile.The trader is able to change any “Pips” or “quantity” amount shown onthe Maker's panel by means of a numerical keyboard, using the enter keyto move from field to field. Alternately, changes in the numerical datacould be entered by selecting the field with a mouse or other pointingdevice, with a single click indicating an upward increment of one Pipand a double click indicating a downward increment of one Pip. Once thetrader has changed the displayed numerical information to hissatisfaction, he may then send a double sided bid/offer quote message(QuoteSubmit, FIG. 5) either by activating Send button 52 with a mouseor a conventional tab key and enter key, or by using a dedicated Sendkey on the trader's keyboard (not shown). Optionally, the trader mayalso send a single-side bid or offer, using the Bid button 54 or Offerbutton 56 instead of the Send button 52. Once the quote has beentransmitted, an optional timer (not shown) may provide a visible and/oraudible indication that a predetermined exposure time has elapsed. Inaddition, the trader may specify in his Trader Profile panel (FIG. 4) anoptional automatic quote interrupt, whereby the quote is withdrawn oncea predetermined maximum exposure time has been reached. At any time, thetrader may use the Off button 60 to withdraw his current quote,whereupon he may compose and send a new quote.

Preferably, as will be discussed in additional detail with respect toFIG. 7, at the same time the system uses the quote and any associatedcredit prescreening information to determine the dealable prices to bedisplayed at each potential counterparty, the system also determineswhether the current quote is equal to the Dealable price (either BestDealable or Regular Dealable) available to any potential counterpartywith whom bilateral credit currently exists, and if so, alerts thequoter that the displayed price has priority in time over any otheravailable quote for that deal size (regular or small) from other tradingfloors and is subject to immediately being hit/taken (a “Red Dealable”quote, preferably indicated by red background) or is equal to such a RedDealable (regular or small) quote from another trading floor (a “Joined”quote, preferably indicated by a =sign and a yellow background).

As shown in FIG. 4, each trader can call up a “Trader Profile” screen 70to select his current trading currency 72, and also to establish ormodify his personal default values for normal and maximum trading size74, 76 and price time limit 78, and his preferences regarding optionalautomated trading protocols 78, such as canceling a quoted price thathas been partially dealt (only a portion of the available size wasmatched with a qualified counterparty) or bettered (is not equal to theBest Dealable price for that size that is currently available to anypotential counterparty with whom bilateral credit still exists). Asnoted previously, the trader may also elect to display the Regular 80 orBest 82 Dealable price, and the system also provides the trader withvarious options 82 for automatically “working the balance” in the eventthe trader attempts to buy or sell a particular quantity at thedisplayed Dealable price but misses the deal in whole (“complete”) or inpart (“partial”). Depending upon the particular option selected, thesystem automatically generates and transmits a bid at the last Dealableoffer price if the trader was not able to buy the full quantity desired,for a quantity equal to the difference between the desired quantity andthe quantity actually traded.

In addition, a Floor Administrator (preferably for internal securityreasons a bank employee free of any trading responsibilities) has hisown WS with a Floor Profile screen (not shown) which includes an optionto prevent his own traders from trading with each other, and a maximumBusiness Day Credit Limit for each eligible counterparty whichrepresents the maximum cumulative value of trades that may be executedby all traders of the Trading Floor with the designated counterparty.Alternately, the system could combine transactions from related TradingFloors, in which case the Floor Profile could merely identify a commoncredit facility having a single credit limit for each Trading Floor orgroups of Trading Floors. The Floor Administrator also selects a warningpercentage which the system uses to broadcast a warning message to theAdministrator and all the traders on a given Floor that a particularcounterparty has utilized a specified percentage of its availablecredit, in which case the traders may wish to alter their tradingstrategies and/or the Floor Administrator may choose to raise theapplicable credit limit.

FIG. 5 shows the flow of electronic messages relating to thedistribution of customized Dealable price information to each TradingFloor. The trader at WS A1a1 of Trading Floor A1a uses his PriceQuotation (Market Maker) Panel (FIG. 3) to generate a QuoteSubmitmessage to the Trading Floor's MAN (MAN A1a) in the form of a bid to buyat 1.7215 and an offer to sell at 1.7216. The MAN in turn logs theQuoteSubmit as two open quotations (one, if a single-sided quote) andforwards the QuoteSubmit message to the Maker's Arbitrator Node (ARB A)whose assigned geographical Trading Region includes the Maker's TradingFloor A1a1. In turn, ARB A updates an ordered list of available bids andan ordered list of available offers for the relevant currency pair, eachbid or offer being ranked by price and time of receipt (preferably atthe Maker's ARB), and containing data fields for indicating the Quantity(preferably expressed in Base Currency units) of the Local Currencystill available for purchase or sale, and the Quantity reserved by theArbitrator pending completion or failure of a pending deal resultingfrom a potential match initiated by the arbitrator and not yet confirmedby the Maker and Taker. A corresponding QuoteAvailable message is thentransmitted from the Maker's ARB A to the MD's in its Trading Region MDA1, MD A2, and to the other ARB's for eventual distribution to the MD'sand MAN's of other Trading Regions.

Each MAN (for example, MAN A1b) also transmits a CreditUpdate message toits associated ARB (ARB A) whenever the credit status for any of itspotential counterparties (for example, A1a or A2a) changes fromCreditAvailable to CreditNotAvailable or vice versa, which the ARB thenretransmits to its affected MD's and to the other affected ARB's.

The MD's then use the information in the received CreditUpdate messagesto maintain a Preauthorization Matrix PM such as that shown in FIG. 6.The rows and columns of the matrix PM are associated with the variousTrading Floors A1a, A1b, A2a, etc (including any Floors in other TradingRegions) and for each ordered pair of Trading Floors {TF_(i),TF_(j)}contains an indication as to whether TF_(i), has extended any credit toTF_(j). In the depicted example, credit exists on a bilateral basisbetween TFA1 and TFA2, no credit exists between TFA1 and TFB1, andcredit has been extended unilaterally from TFB1 TFA2, but not vice versa(as indicated by the “1” at the intersection of row TFB1 with columnTFA2 and the “0” at the corresponding intersection of column TFB1 withrow TFA2). From the main diagonal of the matrix it can be seen that onlyTFA2 permits its own traders to trade between themselves, as indicatedby the “1” at the intersection of row TFA2 with column TFA2. Preferably,each MD only maintains a partial Preauthorization Matrix containing dataonly regarding credit extended from or to its associated MAN's to theother potential counterparties (MAN's) in the system. Thus, as indicatedin FIG. 6 by cross hatching, some of the matrix entries may be blank.

The MD's use the QuoteAvailable messages to update their own orderedlists of available bids and offers; these ordered lists and theabove-described Preauthorization Matrix are then used by the MD tocalculate separate Dealable prices for each Trading Floor which aretransmitted as MarketView messages to the affected MAN's, as will bedescribed in more detail hereinafter with reference to FIG. 7. Inaddition, the MD's and/or ARB's use a similar procedure to identifywhich quotes from which Trading Floors are “Red Dealable” or “Joined” or“Bettered”: A quote is “Red Dealable” only if it is the basis (best inprice and time of the bids or offers originating from Trading Floorswith which bilateral credit is still available) for a Best DealablePrice displayed at one or more Trading Floors; once the “Red Dealable”quotes have been identified, the other quotes may be readily categorizedas either “Joined” (if not first in time) or “Bettered” (if not best inprice).

The actual deal is executed using a known two-stage commitment loggingprocess (not shown) in which DealVerify and DealVerifyOk messages arelogged by and transmitted from the Maker's MAN to the Taker's MAN andvice versa, after each MAN has verified that the other party to the dealhas been extended sufficient credit by the Man's associated TradingFloor to cover the full deal quantity (otherwise the deal is aborted oris cut back in quantity). As an additional precaution, the Maker's MANalso checks that the quote has not been interrupted and that the WS fromwhich the quote originated is still on-line, before any DealVerify orDealVerifyOk message is transmitted to the other Trading Floor(equivalently, each WS involved could perform its own logging andcommunicate directly with the other WS; however, this would complicateany subsequent automated deal recovery or rollback). A suitable logging,verification, and recovery/rollback process is disclosed in furtherdetail in the commonly assigned U.S. Pat. No. 5,305,200 and entitled“FINANCIAL EXCHANGE SYSTEM HAVING AUTOMATED RECOVERY/ROLLBACK OFUNACKNOWLEDGED ORDERS”. In any event, it should be understood that eachARB also maintains a log of potential matches which have not yet beenverified or canceled by the affected MAN's, and that if these potentialmatches are not resolved within a predetermined time period, a similarautomated rollback/recovery process can update the ARB's log on thebasis of the logs maintained by the affected MAN's (for example, thematch may be automatically canceled (rolled back) if either MAN does nothave a corresponding entry in its respective log).

FIG. 7 sets forth a possible implementation of how the MD computes aDealable bid for a particular currency currently available to aparticular Trading Floor, which may then be transmitted in the form of aMarketView message to that Trading Floor. Preferably, in order to avoidthe transmission of redundant information and consequent excessiveloading of the communication network, these MarketView messages aretransmitted to a particular MAN only in response to a change in the BestDealable Price for the associated Trading Floor. Moreover, it may bemore efficient to transmit information only for those active currencypairs which the Trading Floor's MAN has previously identified to its MDin an ActiveCurrencyPair message.

As indicated symbolically in FIG. 7 at block 100, the MD first selectsthe particular Trading Floor and Currency Pair for which the Dealablebid and offer price is to be computed (FIG. 7 shows only the computationof the Dealable bid price; a similar computation is then performed forthe Dealable offer price before a new Trading Floor and/or Currency isselected). The MD then resets (block 102) the counters, registers andflags (i, P, Q, S) it will use in the computation of the Dealable priceP.

What follows is a loop controlled by counter i, which points to theentries in the particular ordered Quote List associated with theCurrency Pair and transaction type (bid or offer) then being processed,and which is incremented at the beginning of the loop (block 104). Ifthe end of the Quote List has already been reached (Yes branch fromdecision block 106), the current values of the price P and theassociated Small flag S are transmitted to the Trading Floor TF,together with an indication of the current Currency Pair CP (aspreviously noted, no such transmission is required if the price andSmall flag for that Currency Pair to that Trading Floor are unchanged).However, if the end of the Quote List has not already been reached (Nobranch from decision block 106) the next quote is then read (block 110)and the relevant entries in the Preauthorization Matrix for the currentTrading Floor (TF) and the Maker of the current quote (Mi) are thenchecked to determine if any previously extended credit has already beenexhausted (decision blocks 112, 114). If either entry is “0” (indicatingno credit available) control passes to the beginning of the loop (block104), for processing of any remaining quotes in the applicable list.

However, if both relevant entries of the Preauthorization Matrix are “1”(indicating at least some credit is available on a bilateral basisbetween the current Trading Floor TF and the Maker M_(i) from which thecurrent quote Q_(i) originated), the price Pi associated with quoteQ_(i) is loaded into the price register P, and the associated AvailableQuantity Q_(i) is added to the contents of the Quantity register Q(block 116), which is then tested (decision block 118) to determine ifat least a predetermined minimum quantity (eg, 5) is available to thecurrent Trading Floor TF; otherwise control passes to the beginning ofthe loop (lock 102) and the process is repeated.

Assuming that the predetermined minimum quantity is available (Yesbranch from block 118), the Small flag is reset to 0 in block 120, andcontrol passes to block 108, whereby the Dealable price is transmittedand the process is repeated.

It will be understood that the above assumes that a Best Dealable Pricemay be based on a potential composite deal which is based only on quotesfor a small size of the currency in question and that a Best SmallDealable Price is to be displayed only if such a regular dealable priceis not available from any qualified counterparty or combination ofqualified counterparties; if as mentioned previously it is desired todisplay only Best Regular Dealable Prices from a single source and/or togive each trader the option of displaying either the Best Small DealablePrice or the Best Regular Dealable Price, then it may be necessary toscan the available quotes twice (once for the best available regularsized quote, once for the best available quote regardless of size)and/or to maintain separate registers for Best Regular Dealable Pricesand the Best Small Delable Prices.

By using more than one MD each in the form of a dedicated computer, thecomputation of Best Dealable Prices is distributed among severalcomputers and is free from interruption by other unrelated tasks.Moreover, only a minimum amount of essential information is transmittedto the MD from its ARB, and from the MD to its MAN's. Thus even in afast moving market, it should be possible to provide current Dealableprice information to each Trading Floor. However, if an MD isresponsible for distributing Dealable prices to more than two TradingFloors, it may be preferable to use a conventional pseudorandomgenerator to select the next Trading Floor, thus avoiding any biasinherent in the sequence in which the Dealable price information iscomputed and distributed.

As mentioned previously, the MD could, at the same time it reviews theordered list of available quotes, also identify any quote whichqualifies as “Red Dealable” or “Joined” and transmit a correspondingHitAlert message to the Maker's MAN (possibly via the Taker's ARB andthe Maker's ARB). Alternatively, each ARB could repeat the process ofFIG. 7 for each Trading Floor in the entire trading system, which wouldrequire more computational resources but fewer communication resources.In particular, such an alternate embodiment, as shown in FIG. 5, wouldrequire at most only one HitAlert message for each bid or offer (to theMaker's MAN from the Maker's own ARB).

1. A computerized trading system for enabling a plurality of traders totrade with one another, the trading system comprising: a centralcomputer system including at least one computer, the central computersystem receiving quotes; a plurality of trader terminals, each of thetrader terminals being associated with a respective trader, at leastsome of the traders sending one or more of the quotes to the centralcomputer system via their respective trader terminals; the centralcomputer system forwarding best dealable quote information to eachtrader terminal of at least a subset of the trader terminals indicatingwhich of the quotes received by the central computer system is the bestquote which can be accepted by the trader using the respective traderterminal as a function of credit information related to such trader; andeach trader terminal of the subset displaying the best dealable quotewhich the trader associated with that trader terminal can accept as afunction of the best dealable quote information sent to it whereby suchbest dealable quote has been prescreened for credit.
 2. The computerizedtrading system of claim 1, wherein the central computer system is adistributed system of computers.
 3. The computerized trading system ofclaim 2, wherein at least some of the computers are located at locationsremote from one another.
 4. The computerized trading system of claim 1,wherein the subset of trader terminals includes at least three traderterminals.
 5. The computerized trading system of claim 1, wherein thesubset of trader terminals is all of the trader terminals.
 6. Thecomputerized trading system of claim 1, wherein: a plurality ofbusinesses use the computerized trading system; each of the traderterminals is associated with an associated one of the businesses; andthe central computer system receives a respective portion of the creditinformation from each of the businesses.
 7. The computerized tradingsystem of claim 6, wherein the portion of the credit informationreceived from each of the respective businesses indicates creditinformation about at least one of the other businesses.
 8. Thecomputerized trading system of claim 1, wherein the quotes are for aproduct.
 9. The computerized trading system of claim 8, wherein theproduct is a financial instrument.
 10. The computerized trading systemof claim 9, wherein the financial instrument is a currency pair.
 11. Thecomputerized trading system of any one of claims 1 through 10, whereinthe credit information is bilateral credit information related torespective pairs of traders.
 12. The computerized trading system ofclaim 1, wherein, for each respective trader using the subset of traderterminals, the credit information related to the respective traderincludes information indicating whether entities associated with othertraders have granted credit to the respective trader.
 13. Thecomputerized trading system of claim 12, wherein the entities associatedwith other traders grant credit to the respective trader by grantingcredit to an entity with whom the respective trader is associated. 14.The computerized trading system of claim 1, wherein the central computersystem also forwards best market quote information to each traderterminal of the subset of trader terminals providing information aboutbest quotes entered into the trading system whether such quotes can beaccepted by the trader using that trader terminal based upon creditinformation related to such trader or not.
 15. The computerized tradingsystem of claim 14, wherein the best market quote information isindicative of the best quote entered into the trading systemirrespective of whether or not the trader using that trader terminal canaccept such quote based upon credit information related to such trader.16. The computerized trading system of claim 15, wherein each traderterminal of the subset also displays information about the best quoteentered into the trading system, whether such quote can be accepted bythe trader using that trader terminal or not, based upon the best marketquote information forwarded to it.
 17. The computerized trading systemof claim 14, wherein each trader terminal of the subset also displaysinformation about quotes entered into the trading system that cannot beaccepted by the trader using that trader terminal based upon the bestmarket quote information forwarded to it.
 18. The computerized tradingsystem of claim 1, wherein the credit information is information relatedto the amount of credit entities associated with other traders extend tothe trader using the trader terminal in question.
 19. A computerizedmethod of providing information to a plurality of traders usingrespective trader terminals, the information relating to quotes whichcan be accepted by the traders, the method comprising: sending quotes toa central computer system comprising at least one computer; determiningat the central computer system which quotes can be accepted by eachtrader as a function of credit information related to that trader;forwarding information to each respective trader terminal theinformation being based upon the determination and indicating the bestquote that can be accepted by the trader using that trader terminal; anddisplaying at each respective trader terminal the best quote the traderusing that trader terminal can accept.
 20. The method of claim 19,wherein the best quotes that can be accepted by the trader using therespective trader terminal are displayed at designated locations of adisplay associated with the respective trader terminal.
 21. The methodof claim 20, wherein the designated locations include a best quotelocation and a best offer location and wherein the best quote, if any,and best offer, if any, which can be accepted by the trader using therespective trader terminal are displayed in the best quote and offerlocations of that trader terminal, respectively.
 22. The method of claim21, wherein no other quotes are displayed in the best quote and bestoffer locations, respectively.
 23. The method of any of claims 19through 22 and 24, wherein the credit information is bilateral creditinformation between respective pairs of counter-parties.
 24. The methodof claim 20, wherein the designated locations are visually distinctlocations of the display.
 25. A method of trading on a computerizedtrading system, the method comprising: entering a quote into thecomputerized trading system on behalf of a first trading entity; thecomputerized trading system determining whether the quote should beoffered to a second trading entity as a function of the amount of creditthe first trading entity has extended to the second trading entity; thecomputerized trading system offering the quote to the second tradingentity if the determination is positive and not offering the quote tothe second trading entity if it is negative; the second trading entityindicating that entity's desire to accept the quote; and thereafter thecomputerized trading system rechecking the amount of remaining creditthe first trading entity is extending to the second trading entity anddetermining whether all or a portion of the quote can be accepted as afunction of the amount of remaining credit.
 26. A method for permittinga plurality of market makers to trade anonymously with a plurality ofmarket takers over a computerized trading system, at least some of themarket takers using respective taker terminals to trade with one or moreof the market makers, the method comprising: entering quotes from themarket makers into the computerized trading system; entering creditinformation into the computerized trading system, the credit informationbeing related to the amount of credit at least entities associated withthe market makers extend to at least some entities associated with themarket takers; and determining, for each of a plurality of takerterminals, a best quote which can be accepted by the respective markettaker using the respective taker terminal as a function of at leastboth: (a) the quotes entered into the computerized trading system; and(b) at least a portion of the credit information entered into thecomputerized trading system and related to the respective market takerusing the respective taker terminal; and displaying the respective bestquote at the respective taker terminals.
 27. The method of claim 26,wherein a plurality of the market takers are associated with a singletrading floor and wherein part of the entered credit information isindicative of the amount of credit extended to the single trading floorand is therefore related to the amount of credit extended to the markettakers associated with the single trading floor.
 28. The method of claim26, wherein each taker terminal displays a respective best quote whichcan be accepted by the market taker using that taker terminal as afunction of both the quotes entered into the computerized trading systemand at least a portion of the credit information entered into thecomputerized trading system.
 29. The method of claim 26, wherein atleast some of the market makers use respective maker terminals to tradewith one or more of the market takers and wherein the market makersenter their quotes into the computerized trading system via theirrespective maker terminals.
 30. The method of claim 26, wherein thecredit information is entered into the computerized trading system viaadministrator terminals.
 31. The method of claim 26, wherein: theentered credit information is also related to the amount of credit atleast some of the market takers extend to at least some of the marketmakers; and the best quote displayed at the plurality of taker terminalsis determined as a function of a portion of the credit informationentered into the computerized trading system and related to at leastsome of the market makers.
 32. The method of claim 31, wherein the bestquote displayed at each respective taker terminal is determined as afunction of bilateral credit between the market taker using therespective taker terminal and the market maker who entered the quoteinto the computerized trading system.
 33. A method of trading on acomputerized trading system, the method comprising: entering a quoteinto the computerized trading system on behalf of a first tradingentity; the computerized trading system determining whether the quoteshould be offered to a second trading entity as a function of at leastthe amount of remaining credit a first credit granting entity, which isassociated with the first trading entity, has extended to a secondcredit granting entity, which is associated with the second tradingentity; and thereafter the computerized trading system offering thequote to the second trading entity if the determination is positive andnot offering the quote to the second trading entity if the determinationis negative, whereby the quote has been prescreened for credit.
 34. Themethod of claim 33, wherein the computerized trading system determineswhether the quote should be offered to the second trading entity also asa function of the amount of remaining credit the second credit grantingentity has extended to the first credit granting entity, whereby thequote has been prescreened for bilateral credit.
 35. The method of claim34, wherein the second trading entity informs the electronic tradingsystem that it wants to accept the quote after it has been offered tothe second trading entity.
 36. The method of any one of claims 33 and34, wherein the first and second trading entities are first and secondtrading floors, respectively, each trading floor having a plurality oftraders who trade on the computerized trading system on behalf of theirrespective trading floors.
 37. The method of claim 36, wherein thetrading floors are owned by respective businesses.
 38. The method ofclaim 36, wherein the first and second credit granting entities are thefirst and second trading floors, respectively.
 39. The method of claim36, wherein the quote is entered into the trading system by a trader ofthe first trading floor.
 40. The method of claim 33, wherein the tradingentities are the credit granting entities.
 41. The method of claim 33,wherein the second trading entity informs the electronic trading systemthat it wants to accept the quote after it has been offered to thesecond trading entity.
 42. The method of claim 41, wherein, after thesecond trading entity has indicated its desire to accept the quote, thecomputerized trading system rechecks the amount of remaining credit thefirst credit granting entity has extended to a second credit grantingentity to determine if there is sufficient remaining credit for thetrade to be made.
 43. The method of claim 42, wherein, after the secondtrading entity has indicated its desire to accept the quote, thecomputerized trading system rechecks the amount of remaining credit thefirst credit granting entity has extended to a second credit grantingentity and the amount of remaining credit the second credit grantingentity has extended to the first credit granting entity, to determine ifthere is sufficient remaining bilateral credit for the trade to be made.44. The method of any one of claims 33 and 34, wherein the computerizedtrading system comprises a central computer system including at leastone computer and a plurality of trader terminals.
 45. The method ofclaim 44, wherein the computer offers the quote to the second tradingentity via one or more trader terminals associated with the secondentity.